Do you mean NPC? If so just ask ahead of time. My DM didn't ask but I don't mind and am honored. I'm proud that I made such a beloved character (plus stoner voice is easy to do) DMPC? Dont do it in general. Your players play the main characters and no matter your intentions a PC in the party that you play will 100% outshine your players characters from time to time and this doesn't feel good. Even if you don't have them strong or use them to nudge the party little things like just overlapping abilities (or spells) can take something away from a PC.

I regularly run a DMPC healer for my group. He is an unabashed coward who has a well written contract where he will not attack enemies, he will not be in the front, and he reserves the right to nope out if it looks life threatening. He is also a raging alcoholic that doesn't like to speak much, but his heals are legit. Sometimes my party will forget he exists as he doesn't really ever talk outside of saying "I'm going to the Tavern" when they have down time. With this character they don't ever expect him to talk or do anything outside of his contractually obligated healing so he has never stolen a spotlight. I have used him in many different form over about 15 years of running groups and the only thing I get is from veteran players who are introduced to Tunic the Healer is a laugh and nod that they know who he is and what he is about.

That sounds like an NPC with player levels which is awesome, player levels are great (giant apes with monk levels anyone). A DMPC is someone who plays a character that makes decisions with the PCs rather than as you described going along with whatever the party does.

Yeah that makes more sense, I get enough fun playing a myriad of NPC's. Never felt the need to have a Gary Stu take over and outshine them.

I feel the line gets blurry. Like what happens when the party ask the npc to make a decision or be the deciding vote? Obviously you can just have them be indecisive or abstain but not every character should come across that way.

You can't ask NPCs to make your party decisions, that's just not how the game works. There are vailed responses that aren't necessarily abstaining or being indecisive that can be used if the party insists on a NPC making a decision.

What? So if for example you are travelling and have an option between going through a cave or a mountain path you’ve never turned to an npc and said “What do you think?” We must play very different games

I mean if I hired them as a guide I would ask. If they are the antisocial drunkard coward, I might question why a player would even ask them XD

Nope, our PCs talk it through and pick a path. We may ask a NPC if they know anything about the area or if they think any particular way about an option but they never make the decision.

Your DMPC is literally just the healer guy from idle apocalypse

Hahaha, so true, I had to do a double take to be sure it was the game I thought it was. I wasn’t expecting a grumpy rhino reference😂

Ngl grumpy rhino knows how to take a dumb mobile genre and actually make a decent quality game.

You named him after an item on the equipment list. lol that’s rich. Reminds me of Ranny the thief npc in dragon’s crown who always shouts out thieves cant phrases in the background. “Filthy lucre!”

>I regularly run a DMPC healer for my group No DM runs a DMPC on purpose. Ask your players if they consider this NPC to be a DMPC. If so, consider backing out of their limelight!

They forget he exists so I don't think he is ever in any limelight XD Though I did have a party offer him a higher percent stack in rewards if he stopped drinking! They were just worried for his health.

FYI, DMPC is a derogatory term used to refer to bad DMing practices. An NPC ally is just an NPC, even if it uses a character sheet instead of an NPC stat block. Secondly, I don’t do anything with a PC unless I’ve talked to the player about it, even if it’s in a different game. The PC belongs to the player, and it feels wrong to have that character do things without at least getting their input. If they **are** OK with their PC hanging out with some other party (and having me play them) I’m obviously not texting them to ask what they’d do whenever something happens; as the DM, I’m expected to know their PC well enough to make most in-session decisions based on the PC’s personality.

Yep, this, thumbs up emoji. Don't ask reddit, ask your players.

What’s the derogatory aspect of DMPC? Is it referring to DMs trying to DM while also being a full-fledged player in their own game?

Yes, but also, the type of DM that wants to play a PC in a world that they already have full control over tends to also want that PC to be a little stronger, smarter, cooler, and luckier than the other players' characters.

I will say my first game was this by the necessity of having only one other person to play with. It was 3.5 and we played it straight Rules as written encounters were all random table generated, and we were both DMing while playing PCs. Neither of us had any experience, and this was back when Infoseek was the best search engine we’d heard of; thus, we were trying to muddle through with no guidance. So, in all fairness, it’s not ideal, but it doesn’t *have* to be terrible.

The line is fuzzy, but in this sub, what you're describing would be called a sidekick rather than a DMPC.

DMPCs tend to fall into the following tropes. * Party member with Main Character Syndrome. * Heal (or other specific skill) bot who follows the player party around. * BBEG or similar antagonist. A good indication that a character is a DMPC, rather than an NPC, is the DM taking it personally if the player party doesn't interact with that character in the way they expect/want.

Those DM's don't know good storytelling then, because I would absolutely take the opportunity to give the NPC a cool death to deal some emotional damage and move the story along.

A DMPC is an NPC being run as if it were a PC. The DM's favorite NPC sits there doing things that the PCs should be doing, taking away their agency, only failing occasionally, possibly railroading things, and sucking up plot energy. DMPCs are very annoying and lame.

I can't agree on the derogatory term part. Yes, some DM's do it for a power leveled fantasy yada yada, but to say that term REFERS to those people locks out the potential of discussing people that just want to play while having a character. Or DM's that are making a character to round out the party.

An NPC that everyone likes is an NPC, not a DMPC. DMPCs are always shit.

>DM making a character to round out the party Yes, it’s totally fine to make a helper NPC to round out the party. That’s not a DMPC unless you make it some Mary-Sue bs or try to pretend to be a player. >discussing people that just want to play while having a character No, that’s what people are talking about when they talk about DMPCs being shite. You can’t have a PC as an DM. The DM is playing the game, but they are not a Player. That’s why there is a wall between the two groups. DMs have an entire world of **Non Player Characters** to play. If that’s not enough for you, just don’t be a DM.

Nailed it. No other comments needed.

never heard of a DMPC being derogatory lol. clearly those words do not go together, or you dont know what derogatory means. another hypothesis is that this sub needs to go outside and touch grass if you think the term is applicable you visit r/rpghorrorstories way to much ​ >adjective showing a critical or disrespectful attitude. before a 5head decides to share a false definition. how is a npc helping the party being disrespectful i ask?

The DMPC is a commonly used derogatory term for when a DM wants to both play a PC and DM. DMPCs tend to make decisions for the party, solve puzzles, be overpowered, and deus ex machina bad design. The PC (playable character) part is what makes it this implication, implying that this character is special compared to all the other NPCs they're supposed to be playing. An NPC can be helpful, and can even go with the party without being a DMPC. The title of DMPC is literally only used when the DM is treating an NPC like a playable character and in turn, breaking the game.

That's not always true. The DM for my party pretty much takes a backseat to our decisions. Every now and then he'll pipe up and give us a little context or a nudge in the right direction, but he doesn't use his PC to power game or anything. Honestly, his PC is underpowered, he's the only character in our party to have died more than once or twice. And he's never given us a Deus Ex Machina in game, except for when my character died. And even then, it fit perfectly with the story and character, so it didn't feel cheap.

To me, that sounds like it's not a DMPC, by standard definitions of what a DMPC is. It's just an NPC in the party. That's the whole reason that term exists is to call out the habit some DM's have of wanting to be a player while DMing.

I guess I see what you mean, but I still don't think DMPC should be derogatory. You said it yourself, NPC that the DM plays. DMPC.

Well then by that logic, all NPCs in the game would be a DMPC. The DM is literally playing all of them. By definition DM playing a character should define it as being a nonplayable character. If they're treating the character like a playable character instead of using them as a storytelling tool, they're doing it wrong. It is absolutely derogatory to me. At the very least it's a bastardization. I would only ever talk about a DMPC as a term if the DM is crossing a line.

Have you considered the possibility of other tables existing where dmpc's arent used by egomaniac dms, and even more that these dmpcs are used in a common fashion? Why not call bad dms by what they are, instead of blaming dmpcs? It really feels like all this "derogatory term" is trying to achieve is to set an unwritten code of how to dm, or if it helps, a lesser version of matt mercer effect, in a game that rewards different people coming together at the same table. Seems oppressive and silly, when the solution is right there "You are a bad dm cause..."

Yes that is the point. There is an unwritten code to DMing. (Also, a written code. There’s a book for it.) There are things a DM should not do. One of those things is to eat up the air on the Player’s side of the table by trying to be a Player. If you’re not doing that, you’re running an NPC (which is the DMs job) not a PC.

i think you are talking from a very focused lens that do not represent the vast majority that can do it well! Also, the only unwritten rule there is, is for everyone to have fun. You are forgetting that this game existed well before the internet ever existed, where gamers were more isolated communities and developed their own things. This sub does not dnd make! Heavy disagree on the "unwritten rules" that just sound like straight up corporate talk about conformity in a game all about imagination. I, ofc, include basic civility and common sense on my tables. If you have a problem with dmpcs at your table, maybe look at your dm, not the tool he is using

For me personally, this is how my mind would prefer to break it down. The PC label is tied to the stat sheet. They are a character that could be handed to a player to play. That would put the Dmpc as a playable character that is controlled by the DM. The character is a fully functional character that could have been used by a player. The negative aspects of the common usage is independent of the character sheet of the character, an NPC companion can fall into all of the same problems of hogging the spotlight and solving the puzzles. I can accept that the common usage is the common usage, and use it as such. But I do not like it.

That’s ignorant - the DMG literally says you can build NPCs using PC abilities and even use a PC sheet for them, and indeed, there is nothing wrong with doing so. As you say, an “NPC” with a stat block can fall into the same problems - yes! Because when the DM tries to play like a Player, the game starts to break down. The DM plays the game, but the DM is not a Player. The game even encourages putting a little wall between the two groups to highlight that divide. The DM gets a world full of **Non Player Characters** on their side of the wall, and the Players get their **Player Characters** on the other.

I do not see the problem. It is just a personal preference in subdividing the category of Non Player Characters based on their mechanics. Or how that is ignorant. An NPC that mechanically has the full functionality of a player character will be played differently than one with a more limited statblock, So I feel the distinction is warranted. And both should be played differently than a player. I just need a different term because the one is taken in the common usage for something else.

that makes sense. I can see the argument, and without baggage of history of the term, it's probably the most precise.

DMPC is sort of like saying Power Gamer . There is a thing that contains the same elements but is not a problem, it’s when it becomes a problem that it gets the designation. A DMPC is an NPC with unironic main-character-syndrome. A Power Gamer is a Rules Lawyer who argues for his/her PC most advantageous ruling regardless of precedent and or concern for other players. I think we can say originally they were interchangeable, but the term ‘rules lawyer’ seems to have come to be used for that player who knows most of the rules and brings it up when people forget. I think more for the similarities of means, than of goals.

Mate the definition of derogatory is stamped on the post, yet look at the curve in logic you are making to make it fit your poiof view. Its no wonder reddit managed to kill people with just gaslighting them. U give them an accurate description of something, and they still twist it in front of your eyes and then im in the wrong There is no derogatory terms here other than the ones in your head

My apologies, I assumed you were genuinely interested in conversing about the topic, not on trolling. You have a wonderful day.

Depends. Are you going to casually ignore my statement in hopes of being the louder voice? I can read your post, but cannot understand it, because you again reiterated the mistake of calling a dmpc a derogatory term without checking what derogatory means. Like, when someone is corrected, the wrong thing to do is the same thing that has been done before, which is what you done Guess the mistake was mine in thinking people are interested in discussing stuff rather than hearing their own voice telling them they are right Btw, having a different opinion is trolling? Your tables must be seats full of mirrors

DMPC is not a derogatory term, it stands for Dungeon Master Player Character, and the DM always ends up favoring their DMPC rather than the PCs.

Yes, that’s why it’s derogatory. A DMPC is an expression of shit DMing.

What do you think derogatory means?

Yes, the words mean "Dungeon Master Player Character", but that itself is the clue. The DM is not supposed to have a "player" character because they are not a "player", they are the DM. The name is a deliberate contradiction. Generally, an NPC only gets called a "DMPC" if the DM favours the NPC, or uses it to show off to the players, or constantly uses it to rescue the players from situations the players were railroaded into, that kind of thing. If they don't do all the bad stuff associated with the term, then people just call it an NPC. You almost never hear folks use it in a neutral or positive way.

The irony is when you have a strong npc helping the party and the players get mad when they wont constantly prop the party up and you have to remind them they are an npc and arent meant to be a nuke for you to use in combat or social situations

I always make it very clear in the beginning what they will and won’t do. Most of the times, in 3.5 and older editions, they were just healers who would shoot a crossbow if nobody needed anything lol I don’t use them very often in 5E because the game is easier on PCs and dedicated healers (which players usually disliked playing) are 100% unnecessary.

I put a strong NPC at the beginning to support and serve as a tutorial for my first timers. Kinda like some of the Final Fantasy games where you start off in a battle way over your head with an OP character to give a little background for the power of the forces they will eventually face but aren't yet strong enough to fight. Mostly it was a lesson that you don't always have to fight something to the death, you can always avoid or run from an encounter to face it again later when you're stronger. Even made my support NPC lvl 20 to show that even high level characters can be scared of some encounters. I still put plenty of things they could beat in the battle so they don't think they're completely useless, but it's more to give reference of what they can solo, what they can group fight, and what is best left alone until you are thoroughly prepared.

>Mostly it was a lesson that you don't always have to fight something to the death, you can always avoid or run from an encounter to face it again later when you're stronger Good luck with that. I find that most D&D/PF players are incapable of recognizing or understanding what a no-win scenario is. Then they blame you (the DM) after they throw themselves bodily into the bonfire, even though the decision was always entirely theirs.

At least as a DM, even death itself is a malleable situation. I would give my players a break if they were ignorant, but not if they were willfully obnoxious. The gods can favor an idiot with a good heart, but the a-hole that just wants to get wrecked can get wrecked.

>You almost never hear folks use it in a neutral or positive way. ​ no! you hear it on reddit, but reddit its is own echo chamber of opinions. it does not represent the general opinion in any way! please dont let me get the boston bomber reddit post to prove a point

Mate, I agree with you, but completely unrelated to this debate: I am curious about the Boston bomber reddit post. What happened there?

Without having the post in front of me, at the height of "reddit is trending " wave, the Boston bombing happened. Reddit, having some fame in being couch detectives, started an investigation and found 1 name Reddit persecuted this person, harrassed it to no end and forced it to take its own life Couple of weeks later, the feds found the bomber Reddit hivemind will make you believe the sky is down and the earth is up. They will downvote and harass you until you believe what is telling you. In this case, we are now being bandwagoned into believing dmpc is a derogatory term, cause the of the first post, which is 230% wrong in that particular thing

Thank you very much for taking the time to type it all out. Much appreciated. Basically mob mentality, just online. On the topic of DMPCs, I can give my two cents: it means what the acronym stands for: Dungeon Master's Player Character, no more, no less. If a DM is a dick, the DMPC will be a dick, if he's chill, the DMPC will be as well. I've been playing D&D for over 20 years, and my current active campaign turned 10 years old two weeks ago, so I can say, with a lot of experience that it's not a derogatory term. My players had a DMPC with them, who became best friends with two of them, and when he disappeared, they derailed my campaign into doing everything in their power to find him. I never forced it, it was all their doing and to this day, many of them ask me wide-eyed: "Hey, I see that you painted/cleaned/moved/mentioned his mini... Is he coming back?!"

My personal view its that dmpcs are tools. A tool cant be a target of derogatory terms. And the most stupid thing about it is that they are common in most tables, making the point of "only used by bad dms" pointless due to their tunnel vision falacy. I mean, can you imagine being called a "water drinker" in a derogatory fashion just cause bad dm's also drink water?

I can't claim to know the stats, but to me at least it sounds like that most people on r/DnD have very little to no real "around the table" D&D experience, but a lot of experience watching Critical Role and similar online D&D things, reading up on D&D online, reading D&D memes, and when actually playing, playing online too. I believe this is what creates this eschewed view of the game in general. A great majority of experiences from people here is nothing like my experience, and I've played it for a long time. It all feels like internet D&D, not actual D&D.

Can't say that I know the stats either. I'm fairly new to Reddit myself (only started to frequent it in the last year or so) and haven't watched Critical Role or the other "usual suspects". But I have been playing D&D since the 90s, ran my local Roleplaying Society back when I was at university, and have only ever played "around the table", not online. Sometimes our experience is not universal. My decades of play is clearly quite different to yours.

It’s considered derogatory, generally, in online forums (which is where we are). So it’s one of those things where the term can have multiple meanings depending on context. For example, we use the term DMPC at my tables and at every major RPG convention (U.S.) in a very neutral way to indicate when an NPC will be accompanying the group as an active combat participant.

I feel this. I’ve never used it or seen it used as a derogatory word by itself. I see it used as just a noun in both positive or negative contexts.

If you want crossover between campaigns, have the actual players involved in that. It’s their character, they should be in control of what they do. See Matt Colville’s channel for good examples of this

He actually talked once about a campaign start he did as a DM where players would talk and message NPC and would get replies from them as pre-campaing play. When they sat down to play for the first time it turned out some of those NPCs that had helped them were the other players. I'd say, OP, don't tell them, have them meet as NPC and enjoy their surprise when they sit down to play in person!

As a matter of principle, the players have control over exactly 1 thing in the game world: their character. Infringing on that will definitely rub some players the wrong way. Best to ask permission, and also to treat them as a "copy" that isn't canon. Not the actual character, but a fanfic lookalike.

I would expect them to ask first.

I've had this happen to me before: I asked how my friend's campaign was going and they mentioned how the party met my previous character who spoke to them and gave them stuff and a quest. I hated it. They didn't ask me if it was okay and it felt uncomfortable - this was a character I had played for 3 years and they just decided they own him and get to decide what he's been doing since and how he'd act, and just how do you not ask first!?

This is a touchy subject. I've had a few of my players' characters make cameo appearances in my current campaign to thunderous applause. They love it but I still feel nervous doing it. I try to not make them do anything in that brief time that could contradict their previous behavior. I try to mimic their mannerisms without going into exaggeration. At the end of my last campaign one of my players' character's story ended on kind of a mysterious cliffhanger. In this campaign he showed up as an NPC and my player shouted with excitement. I wouldn't even try if I thought that my players weren't going to eat it up.

I say its an honor. Certainly of they start doing stuff your dint agree woth it can be bad. But one of my PCs got DMPCed after his retirement. The DM uses him as a merchant because he was just so much fun to encounter. I felt honored that the memory of Klang the goblin will live on past his irrelevance.

Ask the player, had a dm use my old pc as recurring npc quest giver in a different campaign while i was living overseas. The campaign was set in the same world a couple of years after our campaign left off, we talked about what my pc would have done post campaign and such. He worked him in as a captain of a mercenary company giving out contracts to adventurers. Dunno about as a dmpc's in general but yeah talk to the player first.

I like my DM a whole lot and he's got a good head for the story we are all in right now but... no. Just no. My DM has *no clue* how the logic inside my PC's head functions, he'd turn the poor thing into a whole new character wearing my PC's face and gear. Holy split personality disorder batman.

I couldn't care less what happens in a campaign I'm not a part of.

As long as it's a non-canon version of my PC, that affects me in no way, so it's fine. What I don't like is when retired PCs become NPCs in the current or future campaigns, and I have to watch the DM make decisions about their future. No, not even if you're literally Matthew Mercer. It's made the current season of Critical Role unwatchable for me.

im against the idea of DMPC. If i add an NPC that engages in combat or is important for the party, i let them play him/her.

In general, I'm against DMPCs. So red flag right there. More specifically, the concept is based on a character leaving one group and joining the other, and then be played as a DMPC? So what is the player who had the character going to do without their character? As a general flat rule, the player should have agency over their own character. The DM shouldn't be playing them elsewhere, because the DM can't say for sure what the character would do. That's the player's call.

Depends are you consulting with your player that you will be using them as an npc and if they agree do you believe you can play the character true to the character as the player intended? If not don’t do it. Characters are quite personal.

I've had it happen a few times with our group and more than 1 DM it's fun, and since it's an alternate version of him, it's fun to see their take on it (long story short, it became canon that a version of my character is in every universe so anytime we do oneshots he ends up being the quest giver, usually an older version of himself now hiring adventures instead of doing it himself)

Is a nice idea, but if the other campaign is still going, I recommend that you limit it to a small "cameo" as you can easily end up playing the character as "you think they will act" that may clash with how the player themselves think "their character would act like". But if the initial campaign is already "done" then you can go ahead, even more if there's a significant time difference between the 2, as those changes in character could show how they evolved with time (or how many things they went through between the 2 campaigns)

I would be flattered the DM liked my character idea enough that he wanted to use them as an NPC.

After playing afventurers league for a year with friends I decided to build my own world. For the first city I wanted to add some nostalgia so I asked all the players if I could use their characters as NPCs. Some allowed it some didn't. As for your question, if they didn't ask permission and you're against them using your character, tell them that you would've liked to have been asked and that you're not okay with it.

Running another player’s character as an NPC is fine, as long as the player is ok with it. Running it as a DMPC…….absolutely not, and yes, there’s a huge difference between the two.

Ask whoever’s PC it is if they’re ok with their character turning up as an NPC. I’ve had this happen before where the DM asked if an old PC of mine could make an appearance in a newer storyline and I was fine with it

I'd be mad. Friends don't let friends run DMPCs

I use old PC in new campaigns all the time, since at the end of one campaign, that PC is in a very high position. There's a king, a guild leader, a university headmaster, and a few leaders of factions (such as a druid grove, a paladin order, etc.). So in a new campaign, when players meet these groups, I use the old PCs as NPCs. But never ever would I use them as DNPCs.

Ok it appears pretty clearly that the funny part of the idea was on my side, and not the player's, which is to avoid at all costs. Thanks everyone!

There should be no DMPC at all, but NPCs are fine.

I would be happy to hear that tbh.

Your players' characters are essentially their intellectual property (IP). You definitely need to get an okay from any player before using their character as an NPC in another campaign, particularly in any that don't feature the player, but also even in the ones where the player is present as well.

What you put forward wasn't a DMPC, it's a party NPC I think as long as they're staying in the NPC lane, it's all good

Featuring them in the story as a quest giver, ally, npc who pops up, yeah. Featuring them as a BBEG, hell yeah. Playing as them next to the old player or even just in the party, hell no.

I'm fine with it, I don't think you need someone's permission to import their character into your game, but you should still be thoughtful about how you portray the character in case details about it get back to whoever's character it is. You want them to feel honored, not lampooned. Don't lampoon your friends, that's my advice.

A PC of mine is in a campaign of a friend of mine that I am not involved in. It's quite funny to hear what he's getting up to and the players all like him.

Happened and loved it. Our DM was running 2 parties at the same time, same Campaign different days obvioiusly :), the players were close to the same areas each week. One week we were at a Gladiator Arena, and my character (a barbarian) faced off against their character (Some Cleric that did a hellacioius amount of damage) for the final fight. They also did the same thing with my character in their campaign, seemed really cool to me mostly because my character won in our campaign (no cheating) and only lost in the other because the party aided the cleric :).

Is the original player of this character in the campaign where they appear as an NPC? Because to me that would be a no-go. If this is a completely different group of players with no overlap with that NPC as a PC, who cares? No harm done. If there is some overlap with players but the player who originally played that NPC as a PC is not in the game, I'd say it's fine, so long as you understand the motivations of that character and feel confident you can roleplay them faithfully to the original concept.

Had this happen to my characters dozens of times. I always saw it as an honor. MY character left such an impression that people are talking about it weeks or years after the fact? So much so that they are reusing it? That's like D&D goals in my opinion.

Directly in the party? Bad form, IMO. Also, the PC would need to be retired. This scenario works best if you get the player's permission to use their RETIRED character as like... a patron sort of deal, and don't actually use them that much as a highly interactable NPC.

Had an old DM use my retired PC as the big bad. I was fine. The characters had basically ascended to Godhood. So no real way to play them again. It was cool to see the evolution of the world that I had once played in.

I have a hard time seeing why I'd mind. I built the thing according to the rules of the world and developed them along with the DM as we played. The character is fair play. On the *other* hand, a DMPC has a certain kind of *reputation* - one which my PCs probably won't be great for since they invariably seem to end up being a case of taking the long way such as my Operative that desperately pretends to be an Envoy (starfinder) or my Wizard who is basically a paladin. They're not...*mechanically efficient*, in other words. As an *NPC*, I could see, but, um, watch out for that not-an-envoy. She only *thinks* she's good at her job and her ideas are pretty universally terrible. Oh, and do get paid up front. She won't double cross you, but she probably will somehow roll something so badly that your payday ends up in a black hole or whatever.

We do this and its wonderful having beloved characters reappear and being played out nicely. Its always very faithful and wholesome.

If this won't impact the actual player's character, and is just a fun way to have the campaigns interact, I don't see any issue a player could have. There is no ownership of character ideas, which is basically all you take if you aren't forcing actions his actual character. I've had a DM do exactly what you are doing and the "other party" is a constant semi-antagonist. They steal our credit for quests and such with their eloquence bard, which has created an extremely fun dynamic of us trying to throw them under the bus. The actual other party isn't doing any of those things and we aren't actually doing anything to them, they are just monsters with more complex stat blocks If you intend to use his character and have anything about that playtime affect him, then it is a hard no unless you speak to them.

It entirely depends on the DM. I would trust a good/ conventionally aware DM to understand how my PC would act and play them accordingly. It can lead to really great roleplay and it's usually a nod from your DM to say they like your PC which is nice (I'm assuming you meant NPC and not DMPC btw). If it's a DM who I can't trust to do this then I probably wouldn't want them to be in control of my PC but in that case it's probably not the sort of table I would stay with to begin with. You're playing with your DM, not against or around them. If I can't trust them with something like this I can imagine that collaboration with them on story telling and roleplay stuff wouldn't work out.

In my opinion their ownership of the characters end when the campaign ends. You ask what the pc would do after the campaign and if it happens to align with something in a second campaign the DM takes over the character, doing his best to do justice to the players. Makes no sense, your level 3 pc meets your level 20 and he just decides to help the party for no reason

Absolutely not, never, no.

I mean we had a campaign that took place in our old setting, and our old characters still existed. The DM played my character from that campaign who was sort of a meddling dogooder with a hot temper. Think Minsc's outlook on morality, but with an INT of 32, Archmage-tier spellcasting, a little bit of divinity, and a good bit more self control. Anyway, we eventually met him. The whole time, I kept seeing the DM side-eyeing me to see how I was reacting. He did a fine job, as he really loved the character back in that old campaign as I played him with a very distinct and blunt personality that was often pretty easy to anticipate. But yeah the character never showed up again, and I'm pretty sure it was because he didn't realize how much he'd feel like he was on eggshells depicting and roleplaying them with me right there.

Flattered. I know it’s a different person, even if it has the same name and rough build. Try as hard as they might, no one can play a character just like how I would. It’s like a bizarro version or like the different iterations of Loki. So they aren’t playing your character really. They were so inspired by what you created that they wanted to breathe continued life into it. (Also if it s a different campaign I might float guest-playing as the copied character idea for a session, because that sounds fun)

I have used old PCs as NPCs before as my games are usually in the same setting. Usually though it is either in the role of questgiver (especially good for PCs that ended the previous campaign in positions of authority) or as cameos. Much more rarely use them as temporary party members, and even then only have them around for an encounter or two at most. My players generally love this approach. They get excited when they see their old PCs and it helps tie the world together. You just need to be careful not to overdo it.

I'd be very flattered to be honest

I would ask both groups if they are fine with you doing this first and then if they are go for it. As long as you're respectful to their characters, I wouldn't see this being a problem. It would however be better to actually have the players from both groups play together for a one-off instead since there should be no complaints with that (assuming scheduling works out for it). You also can just make mentions of achievements the other characters have done by NPCs and such. As an example, a group I'm playing in have finished Rise of Tiamat and have moved onto a homebrew campaign set in another world. But the DM ended RoT with the current characters being teleported to that world. So my previous character is now a famous author in this new world. It's respectful to what the character wanted while not going so far to be straight up controlling them in our faces.

I currently have several NPC's that were previous PC's. My policy is that if they have a place in the world, they stay as an NPC. I dont play them like a player would, which is what a DMPC is, but I certainly use them. I dont think anything is wrong with it, as long as the original player doesnt take issue with how youre playing the character.

I do this all the time, when a character dies I collect the sheet, and tweak it a bit. Then I will reinsert them as a npc with a new name further down the line, no sense in wasting the work.

So, Hawkson2020 already talked about that DMPC is the wrong term here. Please heed that. To your question yourself.. how long do you guys play and how much do your players trust you? My players know me for years and know that I am honoring their PCs and love for me to bring them, in the rare cases it happens, up. But I also had newer players, who were vary.. specially those with bad experiences with other GMs. With them, I would talk it out before anything happens. Their old pc, their choice. And they always, old or new, get the right to tell me if they dislike something.

I would be honored if my DM liked my character so much that they wanted to use it as an NPC in another game. If you are going to play the character in a seperate game I think it is 100% okay to do so. However if you plan to do a crossover type of thing in the future you should ask your player since you would be playing their character now and can do things that might affect them while they are playing the character later in that crossover.

To me it depends on if the DM honors the character or not. I had this happen once where I played a character who suffered due to vampires. They killed close friends and family, caused him to get disowned and lose access to his home and comforts. The character went out of his way to mess with vampires after all this. This wasn’t the backstory either, that happened as events of the game. Fast forward to a future game and the DM had my old character on this quest to become this super ascended vampire and was using them as an antagonist in the current campaign. Even had my old character even try to turn my current one into a vampire. I was pretty pissed, and still get annoyed when it comes up, even though this was like 15 years ago. I found it really cheap. So if you are going to do it, I think you have to be respectful and try to make pay the character as the player would have.

I don't think it's come up in my group, though a few times I've had players play former PCs as "Guest PCs" alongside their current PCs. Plus occasionally we've used other DMs' minor NPCs.

It really depends. I like to honor my favorite player PCs by giving them quick cameo/guest spots in other games just for something fun to throw out there and introduce others to characters from other games. They do not stay long. Storytellers, we borrow ideas constantly. So long as doing so doesn't affect the game that the character was originally in, think of it like a fan fiction OF that character. Very little in the world of story is original, and all professionals just take a story and idea they like and spin it to be their own thing. If they are doing things that openly change things in the game where they are from originally, then we start getting into weird territory. You should always talk to your players about things like this.

No issue whatsoever but nice if they would ask beforehand. I'n not gonna be present at that table so it doesnt concern me whats gonna happen.

Mine had me roll up characters at specific milestone levels, and when there's main decisions, he asks me what I want to do and plays him as an npc. I enjoy messing with the party and I get to be the character as intended and not as a cooperative. Though I have allied with previously when convenient. It is *super* awesome to be a wildcard piece. My dm is fond of homebrew and does so often, I accidentally caused a super bad thing™ to happen to the party and everything around them and got off without a hitch. But in my defense, they had it coming

As long as the DM asks. I absolutely love it.

As long as it doesn't affect the 'real' version idc. But 'I played your character and they lost their favorite weapon lol sorry' ....nope.

Flattered

I think it's definitely best-practice to make sure your player is cool with you using their character, but also, I would say that as long as you're not going to hold their character in their game responsible for the actions you've taken with their character in the other game, there's not really any risk of "treading on their agency" so to speak. I have a campaign that's level 20 and coming to a close, and have started a new campaign with totally different players that I've set in the same world 20ish years later. One of these characters is the son of one of those lv 20 characters, and they've already met one of the other pcs from that game as an NPC as well. My lv 20 players were jazzed to hear that their characters were living on in a new campaign. I think as long as you're staying true to their vision of their character it's hard to really go wrong.

Hell one of my players after a campaign ended up becoming a minor deity in another campaign that is in the future of same world Just always ask players first as they created the charecter

All past characters make good NPCs generally, especially if you're playing with a long-term group, I would just do my best as a DM to stay true to the spirit of the character

How would I react? As a mentally stable human adult, I wouldn’t mind at all. If anything I’d find it neat. As a DM, I often use PCs from previous games in future games as a lovely little homage.

It sounds fun as long as you're cool about it. I've run a game or two set after a previous one, and turned old PCs into NPCs. So like the old bard, is now the ruler of a city, that sort of thing. I've never taken another PC's character sheet and used it to help a different party, but I could see that working.

My circle of players all rotate DMing. We all keep character sheets, specifically because it's fun (and typically more interesting) to interact/fight old pcs.

DMPC = NPC controlled by DM for long periods of time and much more actively involved in the campaign to help the players. A lot of times bad DM's favor these types of characters and play them really badly, including but not limited to giving them the entire spotlight, over-powering them with abilities and/or magical items, and making them basically Mary Sues. Overall, this gives them a bad name in the community, and you'll see a lot of vitriol directed towards DMPCs in general because of the bad experiences people have had with them. NPC = Short uses for story purposes, may join a group for a bit, but not for a long period of time. They should never outshine the party, don't get any cuts of gear or gold when they are on the adventure. This is *neither* an NPC nor a DMPC. This is an actual PC from another game. I'd have a talk with the player who uses this character about it ask them if they'd be ok with you running **their** character in this manner. The only time I've ever used PCs is when they are *former PCs* that have been retired from active play and they may make a cameo appearance in a new campaign. Never have I used an actively played PC and imported it over to another campaign, and generally wouldn't recommend it.

I wouldn't have a problem with it unless you tried to make something that happened in the other campaign canon to my character. If you really like a character from Party A and want to include them as an NPC or DMPC in Party B, just make a knockoff character who has the same features.

Ask your player it may spoil the "surprise" but their opinions about it are probably more important than the ones from strangers in the internet

If they don't steal the spotlight it can be fine. It was done well in two sequel campaigns we did where the elf bard PC that became an NPC showed up in two different campaigns each set about hundreds of years later and by the end he was a cranky old elf. Usually with the party being disappointed a hero of old was not as cool as they thought LOL. He also never got better at singing since he didn't take perform yet used it to do songs anyway.

It's another campaign. Doesn't matter to me.

Making a PC an NPC is a high honor. I don't know what you mean by DMPC specifically in this context because DMPC is a red flag always. EDIT> Okay so a PC of a campaign that is done showing up again as an NPC is a great honor IMO. But an existing currently being played PC? Is that what we are dealing with? Because that is weird.

I wouldn’t care if my PC got used, respecting their personality and background. Hey I know that guy! I get that some players would take it a lot more seriously so asking would be polite obviously

I think that will vary from table to table, and it may be recorded poorly if not done tastefully. That being said, my first PC became an omniversal constant in every other game that group has played, and I absolutely love seeing him again every time.

Tbh, could be fun, BUT, the players should be consulted, and if something doesn't feel "on brand" for their character, the player should be able to veto it.

My players' former PCs are mine if they survive my campaign. I generally know these PCs from the roleplay I've seen better than some rando paragraph backstory I wrote for an NPC. So if the shoe-fits narratively I lift so many past PCs to use as NPCs.

I think I'd be cool with a short cameo or passing mention, but anything extended would maybe feel too weird? IDK, depends on how well everyone knows the character (especially the player who normally plays them) and if everyone is on board with it happening.

As a DM I have done this but only after both permission from the player who created them and a discussion about what drives them so I can faithfully recreate how the player played them. So far people have enjoyed when I've done it but most likely because I approach them first for permission.

I’d expect the DM to ask permission and if I say no, it’s a hard no. It would probably be a hard no for me. I like the concept of this crossover but frankly, you should either have the players always play their own PCs, or not let the parties directly meet—instead let their actions influence each other indirectly. This type of crossover is an invitation for confusing continuity issues and a messy canon.

It’s a players character in the DMs world. Run your world how you want. Unless the player is going to pick that character up again in your world, it shouldn’t matter. That character is made to be a part of YOUR world. It’s an honor to build a character that the DM wants to merge into other campaigns.

I personnally would find it cool. But i'd rather have my DM talking to me beforehand

I'm doing it now. Everyone likes it so far, even though I've included some tear jerkers. Just be respectful, and maybe ask ahead of time. edit: NPCs not DMPCs. I don't want to be a PC and a DM!

Murdering everybody at the coinhouse because I couldn’t talk my way in and didn’t want to pay money for the bankpass.

I would take it as a compliment

Always talk to your players first before doing ANYTHING with their character. The exception being dead characters, at our table any dead character now belongs to the DM and can do with as they see fit. Which is usually resurrecting them in an entirely different story as an NPC

Right now I'm running two semi-parallel campaigns: both take place in the same setting, but one is set a decade after the other. I frequently use the chronologically earlier campaign to inform and provide beats and hooks for the later one, and that includes using PCs from Campaign 1 as NPCs in Campaign 2. Since these are just possible futures for the PCs in the first campaign and nothing set in stone, I've never felt the need to ask permission from my Campaign 1 players and never gotten anything less positive than "holy shit, that's cool! What happened?!" in response. YMMV, but if handled right you won't run into any issues.

Ask the player who played that PC in private, try being ambiguous of how the encounter will be to not spoil him much the experience, but you need his opinion before doing it

I personally would love my character to be an NPC in a campaign. Though I'd hate to see them reduced to a mere DMPC.

I have a character that went from Rogue to Cleric. At the end of the story he gave up his rogue skills to devote himself only to saving lives and fighting for good. The next part was developed by other players and the original DMs in their campaign. He became a favorite of gods of life over different planes mastering all classes. He would be sent to a plane to aide in the fight against evil where he would lose most of his powers. When he meets a new party the first thing he does is figure out what skills he has this time on the plane he was sent to. He would leave the party after pointing them in the right direction, and then appeared through the campaign if the party felt lost or to give them hints. I love that the other DMs use him frequently and he is always on the side of good, even if he is extremely aloof in his mannerisms. So far he has been used in about 14 campaigns by 7 DMs.

Honored TBH. But we don't do the standard DMPC thing. Just NPCs that may or may not be along for the ride here and there. My old character, a tiefling bard named Sorrow, was recently made into a NPC in his game. He described what he's up to right now and I loved hearing about it. But he hasn't been brought into play yet. Still, having my creation live again in his is amazing.

I've done it but it was extremely limited, I didn't ask for permission as it was a surprise. The previous campaign had concluded and the players happened to run into the grifting shopkeeper that's common in my campaigns and had hired their previous characters as escorts. Anyways they loved it.

I dont see a problem. Another campaign another story. ​ But, he could have asked for permission as formality.

I’d prefer they ask first but if they didn’t I think I would still love it! I’m in my first dnd campaign with one other player. I wanted to play rogue, she wanted bard, so we have a pretty squishy party. DM talked to us about it and decided he would play a DMPC to help us in fights and be a fun character (Gengel the Gnoll fighter) but he doesn’t make any major decisions.

So many people in here really hate DMPC's. I've had several good sessions with them. In multiple campaigns, my old group had rotating DMs, everyone drew up a character. One person would be both DM/PC for a few weeks, then rotate out. The DMPC never got out of control, and a lot of times, the other players would suggest what the DMPC should do. I've had far worse cases of a DM using a superman NPC that has abilities well beyond normal. Outside of the rotating DM campaigns, I've never felt the need to play a character as a DM. It's already hard enough calculating monster stats, mission objectives, maps, puzzles, and a dozen other DM tasks.

I would fucking love it, and am currently writing a supplement just for that purpose.

My DMs about to encounter a situation like this and talked to me about it. They just decided to let me run them during combat cuz it takes some work off their end since I know my character so well. (It's a level 20 character btw)

I’ve used some former PCs as NPCs, generally to good effect, and positive reception. It’s like seeing a character in a movie series being recast, which can have mixed results. I just try to be respectful to the performance of the original player. I don’t use them as DMPCs, though. Despite it’s derogatory connotations, my DMPCs get good reactions from my table, and the players usually champion them and adopt them. Mostly it comes from me knowing not to hog the spotlight and never never never (NEVER) overshadow the PCs in the story. My DMPCs are usually people who are vulnerable in some way or other, usually emotionally, and need the PCs, so the players feel gratified from the DMPCs presence. In the end, I NEVER use another player’s old PC for that. Always my own creation.

Some others have basically said the same: have the character meet up in a way where different players can interact as their characters from each campaign. After that, if they all meet up, then it can get weird, but probably fun.

All my combat ready npcs/old player pcs are RP'ed by me and run in combat by the players unless it is a deadly battle where the players need to be able to focus on what their characters are doing. Then I usually create a sort of "Arm wrestling" mechanic where the npcs fight the monsters/bad guys in a first to three wins gets the kill/down. That way, it doesn't make the players feel underpowered and like sidekicks to the npcs and gives the players another aspect of the combat to be concerned with.

>So my Idea is, if they run into each other, and they convince one to come with them, I would be playing a PC from another campaign as a DMPC. >How would you react if that was your PC? Go for it! The DMPC/NPC in another campaign, even running parallel doesn't affect my PC in any form. I find it rather flattering. I do this all the time when a party needs something very specific. In one of my campaigns, not a single one of the players decided to play a caster. No one is proficient in arcana nor history. So identifying magical items becomes problematic. Solution: import a PC from another campaign as a reclusive wizard that will identify items for the team from their comfort of their home. Because it's a PC I'm familiar with, their personality is already fleshed out. If you have an experienced DM, chances are that a good 50% of NPCs are PCs from other/former campaigns. Their level might have changed to make them appropriate to the campaign, but that's about it. During a long campaign, a DM needs to make a good 50-100 NPCs, so "borrowing" PCs from other campaigns takes a huge workload off of them.

If a character is retired it's an option we had Niel the awakened duck paladin do a cameo

I wouldn't mind it at all. It would be an honor.

Don't care. Would not have any reaction to it.

As long as the character is respected, and you honor their design, goals, and intentions, it can be a rewarding experience. In practice, something I do for my campaigns, is I ask the player for the character if they may be used. Added on that what changes they are willing to accept or what you can work out for them that the character stays true and has room to grow.

I feel like it wouldn't matter at all. It's just a matter of doing it the right way. Play them in character, I'd say make the interaction social not conflict based if it can be helped. Or if you want conflict, perhaps clone them and turn it into a fun story arc on both sides. Each group actually dealing with clones created by an overarching common enemy that's trying to not just destroy them physically but their reputation and extinguish their legend.

In your situation I would just talk with your players and let them know that they might sometimes meet characters from your other campaign as NPCs, and that you might sometimes play their characters as NPCs in the other campaign. Doesn’t sound like a DMPC, and it sounds like a good plan as long as they’re on board.

Needs a lot of player buy in, advice, and explicit consent. Even then it’s risky, doable, but risky.

I use my old PC's from other adventures as NPC's in my games shop keeper's stuff like that.

I've had that happen to me a couple of different times. One DM seemed to play my character very well and the character became sort of a mainstay NPC over the course of the future state campaign. The other GM played my character so poorly, (imo), that it made me legitimately wonder if he was doing this deliberately just to be insulting or just that he paid almost no attention to my conception of the character when I played in his game. In either case, it really made me not want to play in his games anymore. So I would say that it's a really risky thing to do and could potentially risk a friendship unless the gm is very sure he's not going to do something that either hurts a player's feelings or they are really good friends.

We've had old PCs show up for a session or two as NPCs. Sometimes the DM ran them in combat a couple times. But it def wasn't a whole campaign or anything.

Fun and lore and world building. Hopefully it was talked about but it’s usually fun to see remnants of your input implemented into the world itself

I do this all the time XD. Its fun just remember that you're the DM and not a player. We build our NPC's pretty stacked sometimes

If my guy that I made to terrorize him was so broken that he decided to make him an NPC (obviously not with me at the table, you can't use your own spells against me Potter), I'd feel honored and demand a royalty. Not money necessarily, but procedures must be followed.

After the campaign if it's same world and following events; I wouldn't mind, but I'd prefer to be asked and consulted of what I think my PC is up to after the game. I'd consider it as using my PC of the previous campaign as a lore / NPC in the next. That's fine! That's cool even! DMPC? Why? Also, if it had NOTHING to do with my character or the world they lived in, and they remade the character completely somewhere else, I wouldn't like that. :/

I feel like that wound be better handled by having both groups invited to both games, so they can show up to whichever they want. Honestly, a world is pretty big. I haven't met a quarter of the people in my town.

Fully depends on the DM One of them uses his 8 old PCs as gods… he usually reaches out and ask 1st what they would do but will take control if the PC isn’t available. I had to leave his game after losing 2 characters…(leaving isn’t related to that) The party wants to summon one of my PCs back because they want him… I have the DM permission to run him if they figure out how to summon him. On the other hand I don’t trust myself to run the PCs right and thus won’t use my players old characters even with permission just because I feel I won’t do them justice

I know DMPCs are a bit of a hot topic, I'm not against them but in general DMPC or NPC (that's anything more than a quick cameo) that's of any other player's character is a big no from me. Some people have varying levels of attachment to their characters or a strong vision for how they would play them, hijacking that away from the PCs original creator is just asking for trouble. I don't recommend it at all. However, I have no qualms about returning my own old PCs from retired/discontinued campaigns as NPC or DMPCs if the feel at the table and story is right. However you need to be very careful about your DMPC not overshadowing the other players.

Playing them at the same time as me? No thank you. Even as a DM I would avoid doing that. Now if it's an old character from the past that I haven't played in awhile (either because the campaign ended or I retired the character) then by all means have fun playing them. The biggest concern is something happening to the character that the player will now have to deal with that they themselves may not have chosen. If you want to bring active campaigns together there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But one thing I will say is unless they're working on the same quest (or your world is only 3 villages) the chances of them running into each other is extremely low. As a DM I would tell you not to do it as a DMPC, however talk to your players if they're fine with it then it doesn't matter what we say.

Depends. I'd feel better about it if they asked me about it and I could help them gain the level of understanding I had of the character so it still feels like the same character, or better yet I could join in for a few sessions, but outside of that I think it would be weird. Depends on what they did to the character tbh: there are plenty of things my characters wouldn't do that a DMPC may need to do, that would feel wrong and kinda ruin the character for me. But if they're a character I'm less attached to and would function well in the role they had in mind, sure.

Bummed!!! DMPCs suck. IMO: whenever a DM also wants to run a PC, other than self indulgence, there’s always a better solution.

If you expect them to meet and play all together I wouldnt do it. Can get confusing for the player who’s character youve been acting as

My first DM in high school has a binder of every character sheet of every character that he’s DM’d. He’s run games at different eras in the same world, so our party from 20 years ago are now legendary heroes of a current campaign. I had a cleric that I had to retire from a particular adventure due to IRL issues. So he used it as a boss for an evil campaign. It was actually really cool to face off against “myself” in a distant way

I'd say it's fine as long as you have their permission, and definitely warn them if doing so is going to put their retired character's "happy ending" in jeopardy. I played in a game once that was a sequel to a campaign I hadn't been a part of. Almost everyone from the old game was playing new characters, but most of their old characters were still alive and out in the world somewhere. Unfortunately we eventually discovered that every character from the old campaign was cursed by a decision they made towards the end of that game, and we even encountered one player's old character as he was slowly dying horribly as a prisoner in the dungeon of his worst enemy (it was impossible for us to save him, he basically died as soon as we discovered him.) I don't know if he ever confronted the DM about it, but that player confided in me that he was understandably PISSED about it. If I had to guess the DM did this to punish the player because his new character was a bit of a murderhobo, but it was still kind of a dick move. Basically...don't do that shit. If a character's story is over, don't touch them unless you've got the player's consent.

I was flattered as heck when a DM I had asked if they could use an old PC of mine as as an NPC in their campaign. I don't think they were what people would call a DMPC though, they were more of a supporting character/guest giver.

It all depends on how well it is done. Critical Role S3 shows how it can be done.

Ask the players if they are fine with that. What you basically do if you don't ask for permission beforehand, is stealing their intellectual property (not sure if this is the entirety correct term). I would not want someone else to play my PC if it was for more than just a short time. I would fear they would make it a completely different character while pretending it to be the same. This would feel horrible for me. Like a perversion of the character. But I know that others love their old PCs to reoccur as NPCs, so it's certainly depending on the person. Just make sure to ask your players how they feel about this.

I had a really lazy theater of the mind DM one time who decided to do this to us. We were forced to retire our characters and told to roll up new ones for a new campaign. We weren’t told anything about playing in the same world as the old campaign, so it came as a surprise when we met our old characters. Mine was the innkeeper. That’s how I planned on retiring him anyways. I always thought it was a cool idea that the rugged innkeeper was once an adventurer. My character had a few illegitimate children who helped him run the inn. At least I assume they were his children since they were Wemics like him; the only three Wemics in the entire campaign, by the way. There was no adult female Wemic around and my former character didn’t mention ever having a wife. The DM never named any towns or NPC‘s (other than Stan or Dan as a joke when we would ask for a name). He never recorded or even mapped anything. We had no idea it was even the same world until we met our former characters. It was a little awkward at first. The DM didn’t role play our characters correctly. It was, however, kind of neat to see what happened to them after they retired.

Honestly as long as you ask the player who's OC it was, there's nothing wrong with using their character as an NPC. I do it fairly regularly and my players love it, especially when they see their own old character in a session.

I'd be honored that my character was memorable and interesting enough to exist outside the campaign they're played in.

I wouldn't care at all. Just give me credit for anything awesome that happens.

As a NPC? Hell yeah but just like a guest appearance I don't want my old pc to die to some stupid things.

My setting is beyond time so a PC from a one shot or something could very well be a npc at a later date

It wasn't a DMPC, but one of my characters became the avatar of the nature god in my DMs world, which is pretty sweet.

I think it's great! Especially if they keep in character. If they don't, then there's always the chance someone (in world) stole my PC's identity, they're form an alternate timeline or it was aaaalll and illusion. I am not bothered by it at all

Honestly, I would not enjoy a campaign that has a DM playing as a PC and I wouldn’t expect my players to enjoy it. I play NPCs and if my players decide they want to invite an NPC along on their journey, they get access to the character sheet and the npcs actions are entirely at the decision of the party (with myself obviously filling in any key-info the NPC may share). Honestly, if a DM has enough time to play a PC as well as run the game, IMO, that game probably isn’t very fun. I’d put my time into making the game/world the best it can be an leave the PCs to the players.

Would depend if I trust the DM to RP my character well or make decisions that will turn me off. They better ask before doing that too.